Re: Are ifuncs intended to be allowed to resolve to symbols in another DSO?

[Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>]

* Zack Weinberg:

> Suppose I have two major versions of the same shared library
> (libfoo.so.1 and libfoo.so.2) and the only difference is that
> libfoo.so.2 drops a whole bunch of compatibility aliases.  For
> instance, libfoo.so.1 defines two names, `blurf` and `xblurf`, for the
> same function, but libfoo.so.2 defines only the `blurf` name.
>
> Any program that winds up loading both shared libraries (via
> transitive dependencies) is going to have two copies of the actual
> code for `blurf` in memory.  I could eliminate this duplication by
> having libfoo.so.1 be a thin wrapper around libfoo.so.2, providing
> only a definition for `xblurf` that calls `blurf`.  Good so far, but
> now old applications are making two jumps through the PLT whenever
> they call `xblurf`.  It occurred to me to wonder whether I could
> eliminate the extra indirection (on the second and subsequent calls)
> by making xblurf an ifunc:
>
> extern int blurf(char *arg1, int arg2); // defined in libfoo.so.2
> static int (*resolve_xblurf(void))(char *, int)
> {
>   return blurf;
> }
> int xblurf(char *, int) __attribute__((ifunc("resolve_xblurf")));

This only works if libfoo.so.1 has already been relocated when the IFUNC
resolver is called.  Old glibcs always relocated objects in the wrong
order (bug 12892, fixed in glibc 2.15, probably not widely backported).

Even with that fixed, missing DT_NEEDED entries and LD_PRELOAD can
result in calls to yet-unrelocated IFUNC resolvers.  I had a patch to
mostly fix this, but it added quite a bit of complexity (delayed
relocation processing), and there are still difficult-to-describe
failure cases for complex dependency trees.  The community wasn't
enthusiastic about it.

Lazy binding obscures some of these problems, to the degree that some
programmers call getenv in IFUNC resolvers.

Thanks,
Florian